What kind of students are we producing????

[MaryMary]

If an employee can show that the company has a history or it's rather obvious that it's discrimination...then really it's not okay.

I agree with Beth...double the salary...bleeds that they thought it was okay to pay the woman way less. If they are close in wages...I don't see that it would be discrimination....just more of what you said (how they negotiated).

May I point that "rather obvious" is not a valid agrument in the court of law.

If a store put in their flyer "BIG SALE" words but doesn't lower the price much vs. no announced sale period only people who had done their research on the prices before that sale would be able to make wise decisions to buy or not to buy. How is that for a run-up sentence?
IMO, it's not the amount which makes the discrimination, but the fact. That employee would have to prove that she is paid less because she is a woman, not because of her experience, education, previous jobs, etc. etc. But if she would have done her due diligence or held comparable jobs before, she'd be able to recognize the right level of compensation.
In some bars they have a policy that on certain days ladies do not have to pay cover charge. Do you think men should file discrimination suit against these establishments?
Well, sorry to highjack the topic.

[mxmom99]

If you have not noticed I said what you've quoted in sarcasm.
IMO, we try too hard not to hurt somebody's feelings, even if it means to point out mistakes which prevent this person (child) advancement. A healthy self esteem only benefits from some portion of criticism, and we should call things the way they are, dancing around the issues may only confuse people.

yes, i noticed...i saw the lil whistling smiley i just stating it outright in case anyone missed the point . you and WCBaby are basically saying the same thing on "over parenting" and no one wanting their kid to "lose". kinda like the soccer teams that "dont keep score"....maybe not "offically" but you know those kids are keeping score...they WANT to know who won.

[~~Who,Me?~~]

I have a different POV on homework.
It teaches kids responsibilities and developing working skills. And I do not mean how to do a specific math problem or how to spell that pesky words. They have to get comfortable with an idea that they need to repeat most of the material learned in school in order to fully comprehend and memorize it. I bet many teachers saw intelligent students fail the tests just because they thought they knew the material but actually missed some. If in elementary grades kids grasped the most in class, later on they have to do reports and other projects beyond class time and give it out ON TIME. I've seen high school girls overwelmed with amount of homework to the point they cry, just because they do not have working and time managing skills as per 9-th grade. Later on these kids more likely have trouble managing college.
I'm convinced that any success is 5% your luck, 10% your natural skills and 85% of elbow grease. It shouldn't really matter that 20+ math problems are about pet turtles, it may develop abstraction skills so the principle could be applied to any practical problem.

When I originally heard the story on TV, there were more details that were not in the article. As part of the lawsuit, the parents were able to find and present many different studies on homework--there is no correlation with increased homework and increased student performance. I was unable to find those studies online, but as a teacher, am still looking for them!

I think that students should have much less homework, but would like to see parents make more of that free time. Unfortunately that extra time in the evening would either be spent on the computer, video games, in front of TV or being shuffled to 17 different activities and eating a fast food dinner in the car. IMO, what *should* be happening is healthy meals all together at the kitchen table, family game nights, reading, arts & crafts, etc. I believe that less homework and more free time would be a much greater advantage to our society, if parents actually spent that time parenting. Sadly, by and large that probably wouldn't happen.

The students that I have now, and I teach an "adult class" though most of my students are 18-25, they've grown up in this era of coddling children. We're really doing more harm than good, as students today have no clue on how to deal with disappointment or criticism or fairness. Sometimes life ain't fair, and people need to know how to cope.

[mxmom99]

^kinda funny you say that. my kids tell me all the time "that isnt fair..." my reply "LIFE ISNT FAIR..." maybe a bit harsh, but they are old enough to handle it.

[MaryMary]

yes, i noticed...i saw the lil whistling smiley i just stating it outright in case anyone missed the point . you and WCBaby are basically saying the same thing on "over parenting" and no one wanting their kid to "lose". kinda like the soccer teams that "dont keep score"....maybe not "offically" but you know those kids are keeping score...they WANT to know who won.

how anything less then perfect, #1 in anything, can come from your favorite person on Earth, yourself? It may mean you as the parent is doing something .. how can I say it politically correct.. just 99% super perfect all over? (read: wrong) And.. and.. somebody else can do 100%????


I cannot even say it's "over parenting", just wrong parenting no matter how much of it. Kids of such parents do not tend to try hard (they do not have to if they are perfect already, at least according to their parents ), have tough times when they are on their own.

DD13 asked me recently how do I like her voice. How do I break it to her that likely she is not going to be another Celine Dion? So we make a little recording of her singing "life goes on", your own voice sound so much different to yourself when you sing vs. on the recording or to the other person listening to you.
She got it without me making a single comment.

[MaryMary]

When I originally heard the story on TV, there were more details that were not in the article. As part of the lawsuit, the parents were able to find and present many different studies on homework--there is no correlation with increased homework and increased student performance. I was unable to find those studies online, but as a teacher, am still looking for them!

Anyone familier with principles of data analysing would tell you that most of correlations usually are not liner, usually there is so called "saturation point", after which increase efforts produce "plateau", and in order to kick it up different principles should apply. But it doesn't mean no homework at all would give you the same results as having a balance. More often then not it is structure, not amounts, that will go the most good overall.

I think that students should have much less homework, but would like to see parents make more of that free time. Unfortunately that extra time in the evening would either be spent on the computer, video games, in front of TV or being shuffled to 17 different activities and eating a fast food dinner in the car. IMO, what *should* be happening is healthy meals all together at the kitchen table, family game nights, reading, arts & crafts, etc. I believe that less homework and more free time would be a much greater advantage to our society, if parents actually spent that time parenting. Sadly, by and large that probably wouldn't happen.

I believe not in amounts of time spend with children, but in quality of that time. IMO families where free time utilized properly (as you said healthy meals together, reading, family games), do it not because they have a lot of free time, but they value that time whatever they can spend together.

The students that I have now, and I teach an "adult class" though most of my students are 18-25, they've grown up in this era of coddling children. We're really doing more harm than good, as students today have no clue on how to deal with disappointment or criticism or fairness. Sometimes life ain't fair, and people need to know how to cope.

Just as making sterile environments with bacteria killing chemicals at home lowers the child resistance to various infections. It's good for secluded facilities where compromised people are, but not for everyday life, provided your child doesn't have underlying conditions.
Someone else gets the job you've applied for. Not fair, you are better looking? Well, that's perfectly fair to the person who gets this job: you are better looking and I get to have this job.